August 28, 2025
Today Thomas Richards (@tlthe5th) filed his response (opposition) to X Corp's motion to dismiss in Richards v. X Corp. and Donald J. Trump, Case No. 3:25-cv-916 in the Northern District of Texas. This 25-page brief exposes two critical flaws in X Corp's defense that warrant immediate denial of their dismissal motion.
View the full court docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69885455/richards-v-x-corp/
X Corp Can't Escape Their Written Promises
X Corp's motion completely ignores their explicit FAQ promises posted on their Help Center:
- "When you follow someone, every time they post a new message, it will appear on your X Home timeline"
- "Following someone on X means: You are subscribing to their posts as a follower"
- "If someone follows you... They'll see your posts in their Home timeline whenever they log in to X"
Source: https://help.x.com/en/resources/new-user-faq
These are specific, binding contractual commitments. Despite Tommy Richards (@tlthe5th) having 3,400+ followers, his posts routinely receive only 9-50 views—a 98% suppression rate that mathematically proves deliberate technical intervention.
The Government Connection X Corp Denies
X Corp's constitutional analysis contains a fatal error. They acknowledge his amended complaint "no longer expressly references 42 U.S.C. § 1983" but then analyze all constitutional claims as if we brought them under that statute. He didn't. He asserted DIRECT constitutional violations through unprecedented government-platform coordination.
The timing is actually ironic: X Corp filed their motion on August 14, 2025—the same day President Trump signed an executive order specifically benefiting Musk's SpaceX company.
Source: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-elon-musk-spacex-executive-order-2113401
Documented Government Coordination
Our filing details systematic coordination through:
- DOGE using X as its official communication platform
- Tesla engineers embedded throughout federal agencies - Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/27/us/politics/doge-staff-list.html
- The same Grok AI that moderates Tommy's religious content now performing core governmental functions - Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/grok-elon-musk-xai-pentagon-contract/
- Trump's "Preventing Woke AI" Executive Order favoring Musk's "anti-woke" Grok system - Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/24/no-woke-ai-in-washington-says-trump-as-he-launches-ai-action-plan.html
16 Years of Censorship Escalation
Tommy maintained a compliant X account for 16 years, building substantial reach through 71,500+ posts of biblical accountability journalism. His early warnings about institutional religious abuse have been validated by over $5 billion in documented settlements, including the LA Archdiocese's recent $880 million payout to 1,300+ survivors.
Sources:
- $5 billion total: https://www.ncronline.org/news/more-5-billion-spent-catholic-sexual-abuse-allegations-new-report-finds
- LA Archdiocese settlement: https://www.npr.org/2024/10/17/nx-s1-5155654/archdiocese-of-los-angeles-will-pay-880-million-to-settle-sexual-abuse-claims
Yet after reaching peak visibility in 2009—when his video ranked as the second hit for "Vatican" on YouTube—systematic suppression began. The Vatican's exclusive YouTube partnership to "fight back" against videos like tlthe5th's established the template for coordinated digital censorship that continues today.
Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vatican-launches-youtube-channel-1514238.html
Constitutional Violations Disguised as Business Decisions
When the same individual (Musk) simultaneously heads a federal agency while controlling platform suppression decisions, there's no "private" editorial decision to protect—only government action subject to constitutional constraints. This case presents the first instance where a federal agency head simultaneously controls the platform suppressing constitutional rights.
What Happens Next
We've requested the court deny X Corp's motion entirely. In the alternative, we seek leave to add DOGE as a defendant and include additional claims regarding systematic government-platform coordination.
The court has already noted this case presents "novel" constitutional questions. When unprecedented scenarios involve federal officials simultaneously controlling platforms while suppressing constitutional rights, traditional analysis requires factual development, not dismissal.
The Bigger Picture
This case exposes how government-platform coordination operates to suppress independent voices warning about institutional accountability. Tommy's systematic suppression specifically intensified after criticizing Musk's meetings with Pope Francis and Vatican leadership—the same institutional framework now operating through direct government-platform control.
We'll continue fighting for constitutional accountability and the basic principle that platforms cannot promise one service while secretly delivering another.
Additional Documentation:
- Trump DOJ intervention in clergy reporting: https://www.bishop-accountability.org/2025/07/trump-and-the-catholic-church-fight/
- Vatican AI authority: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-leo-xiv-lays-out-vision-papacy-artificial-intelligence/
Updates will be posted as the case develops.
No comments:
Post a Comment